Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Computing/2012 June 23

= June 23 =

firefox malware
The latest version of firefox is gross malpractice.

I started up firefox a few days (maybe a week) ago on my home computer. I got something saying "updates" were being downloaded and a firefox window would come up in a few minutes. When it did, there were some differences in appearance of the window. There was also a difference in behavior: Google still works normally when I'm not logged in, but not when I'm logged in. I click on something and I see a page for a few seconds. Then it turns to a blank white page and says "loading...". The "reload" button doesn't help. And stays there. The only way to get out it to go back to Google's main page and log out. I cannot use gmail on my home computer.

Such is the latest version of firefox.

Is there a way to revert to the earlier version or some other course of action to deal with the problem?

Is there a way to contact a responsible person at mozilla about this? Michael Hardy (talk) 03:53, 23 June 2012 (UTC)


 * You could uninstall Firefox, then go to their website (using another browser like Internet Explorer), then reinstall the version you want. Unfortunately, you're likely to lose your bookmarks, etc. StuRat (talk) 04:56, 23 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Try restarting with add-ons disabled. If it still doesn't work, file a Firefox bug in Bugzilla. If it does work, re-enable the add-ons then disable them individually until you find the one responsible. -- BenRG (talk) 05:41, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

Thank you, StuRat and BenRG.

I haven't done anything yet, and tonight it's working normally again. I've used bugzilla only for Wikipedia software issues; it hadn't occcurred to me to use it for firefox. Michael Hardy (talk) 03:34, 24 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Great, can we mark this Q resolved ? StuRat (talk) 01:33, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
 * The problem is back. Major malpractice. Michael Hardy (talk) 05:28, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
 * I suggest filing a bug in bugzilla. - Letsbefiends (talk) 22:39, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Looks like malware or virus behaviour. Chances of it orginating from Firefox is next to zero. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 02:08, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

Showing gratitude
How do I thank the volunteer/s who provide me with help?

Hamish 84. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hamish84 (talk • contribs) 07:14, 23 June 2012 (UTC)


 * "Thanks" is traditional. ¦ Reisio (talk) 09:25, 23 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Leave a message on their talk pages?--92.25.110.216 (talk) 09:29, 23 June 2012 (UTC)
 * No, don't do that. This thread is thanks enough, regulars will see your message. If you really want to you could delve into the archives, find your old question and put a thank you message there. 92.233.64.26 (talk) 10:39, 23 June 2012 (UTC)
 * If, however, you want to thank a specific Wikipedian, you can leave a message on their talk page as 92 said above. To do so, click their username in any signature. If you can't find a signature handy, you can use the search box. Type "user:" (without the quotes) and then their user name. Press enter and you are taken to their user page. Now click 'discussion' at the top, which takes you to their talk page, and finally click the '+' link to add a new section. You can now leave your message of thanks. Most users are set up to receive a notification when their talk page is changed, either by seeing it on their Watchlist, or by receiving an email, so this way you can be sure they will see your message.
 * By the way, there is a Wikipedia Help desk whose volunteers answer these sorts of questions all the time. If you have further questions about the best way to use and edit Wikipedia, you might find better and quicker answers there. Also check out the Teahouse, a new project set up specifically to help new editors find their way. You can drop in there and find experienced editors who will take the time to show you about anything that's unclear. You might also find that you are able to pass on your knowledge to someone else, so it's definitely worth taking a look.
 * Best of luck, and happy editing! - Cucumber Mike (talk) 13:55, 23 June 2012 (UTC)


 * You can also award a Barnstar to users who you want to thank or recognize for their efforts. RudolfRed (talk) 19:22, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

nrg files
I used frostwire to download an application and it saved as a .nrg file (never encountered this before). How do I access the application in windows 7. Also the .nrg file is a single 2.6mb file, not a folder containing multiple files.Any ideas?101.112.123.43 (talk) 14:46, 23 June 2012 (UTC)


 * It might help if you told us what the application you downloaded was. 87.114.24.83 (talk) 14:56, 23 June 2012 (UTC)autocad2007, but why should it matter?


 * Entering .nrg in the search bar above would have taken you straight to our article on the file format.  AJ Cham  15:10, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

autocad 2007. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 101.112.114.171 (talk) 10:56, 25 June 2012 (UTC)  You really think I'm so stupid I didn't try that. I found lots about audio CD's and other irrelevant stuff. Arrogant PIG. thanks for nothing.I'm not interested in how much YOU know about .nrg files, I want to use an application. If you can't answer the question. keep your ego to yourself.
 * The second paragraph in our NRG article which you were directed to tells you which programs can mount these files. Use daemon tools or similar to mount the file, and stop being so rude. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.158.236.14 (talk) 14:32, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
 * The second sentence of our article on the .nrg file format has a list of software that can open it. However, if you downloaded something that is only 2.6mb it is definitely not a copy of Autocad 2007. 209.131.76.183 (talk) 14:33, 25 June 2012 (UTC) My mistake  it's 2.6gb

The Art of Computer Programming and algorithms
What is the difference between The Art of Computer Programming and common algorithm courses held at universities? OsmanRF34 (talk) 18:26, 23 June 2012 (UTC)


 * The Art of Computer Programming is a set of books, not a class. Looie496 (talk) 19:35, 23 June 2012 (UTC)


 * They refer to the content, not the format. StuRat (talk) 20:17, 23 June 2012 (UTC)


 * TAOCP was used for such courses and may still be used. Compared to most textbooks used in algorithms courses, TAOCP is heavy on the analysis of algorithms and is more complete, in that it examines many algorithms for a problem.  Bubba73 You talkin' to me? 01:42, 24 June 2012 (UTC)